It looks like Crazystone/Bonobot is currently the strongest bot, and I think it does not use rave, so rave is not essential for 19x19 go.
David > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:computer-go- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Petr Baudis > Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 11:11 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Computer-go] issues on 19x19 > > Hi! > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:23:41AM -0400, Daniel Shawul wrote: > > 2) My second problem concerns use of progressive widening/unpruning > which > > looks like a must to have on 19x19. > > The problem I have is with the move ordering... If I tell it to > moves on > > the 3rd line from the edge are good ones, > > it continually puts its stones on that line (hence forming a square), > while > > the opponent controls the centre and also > > cuts some parts of the 3rd line. > > Then I used fillboard to try and fix this issue, but the engine once > again > > tends to prefer these moves and put stones > > all over the board. Which is when I realized it is impossible to fix > it with > > static move ordering. > > Should I use something dynamic like RAVE to order the moves? That > will be > > inconvinient because I order the nodes > > only during first allocation. > > Also the default progressive unpruning formula seems to select too > few moves > > for consideration, so I had to add 20 additional moves > > to make it work for my engine. > > You should explain in more detail exactly what you are doing right > now, as the terminology is highly muddled. I assume that now, in n-th > tree descent through given node, you consider only f(n) children for > next move instead of all children. Also, I assume you use just plain > UCT > for node evaluation? > > I think progressive bias (considering all children, but giving extra > bonuses to values of some or all children) is much better explored > approach (at least in literature). However, it's certain that just > using > a single criterion for the ordering is not going to work well. You can > either use a mix of patterns, hints from some other engine, or (best) > RAVE values. Plus some extra coefficients for tactical checks (e.g. > atari), last move CFG-distance and distance from edge. > > I think you will find it very difficult to achieve reasonable > performance on 19x19 without RAVE. But if you are reluctant to do that > yet, at least try combining last move CFG-distance, distance from edge, > basic tactics and Mogo 3x3 patterns. The larger the mix, the more > diverse your array of considered moves will be. In particular, I have > found last move CFG-distance to be immensely important for gaining > strength on 19x19. > > -- > Petr "Pasky" Baudis > UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are. > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go _______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
